Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

It's only a problem of "official policy" if you accept that the Ueshiba family has the power to define Shodokan Aikido. Isn't one of the major reasons for cutting a branch that you can write your own definition? That's generally what happens in Japanese arts anyway - "Billy-ryu" branches into "Billy-bob-ryu" with a new and wonderful set of concepts.

Not exactly. The problem starts when it becomes part of anyone's policy (official or otherwise). The result is that you have a very large section of people who practice "Aikido - The Way of Harmony" who want nothing to do with certain groups because what they do is "not Aikido" because their training includes competition for example. This is regardless of what can be learnt on both sides through openness and sharing.

The result is that this policy engenders division instead of unification. Since this thread is about different styles, 1 Aikido I think it is very apt that we are chatting about a perception of an event that may be responsible for ensuring that there is more than 1 Aikido. Not that I have any issue with that.

The great thing is that among individual martial artists, regardless of style, where there is honesty in skill and ability there is often openness of interaction (testing keeps one realistic of ones abilities), which promotes getting together and openly sharing, even unification in some instances. This serves to counteract those who wish to remain separate because of some "decree", as the need to develop oneself through training and sharing with different groups overrides the need to stay cloistered within a safe and predetermined paradigm.

Not exactly. The problem starts when it becomes part of anyone's policy (official or otherwise). The result is that you have a very large section of people who practice "Aikido - The Way of Harmony" who want nothing to do with certain groups because what they do is "not Aikido" because their training includes competition for example. This is regardless of what can be learnt on both sides through openness and sharing.

Well, no art is ever going to be everything to everyone and include all and any methods of training. I think that it is reasonable for leaders of an art to define their vision of what the art does and doesn't encompass, just as it is reasonable for people with different ideas to branch off on their own. But if you branch off on your own with different ideas then it seems kind of odd to want to be included under the old definition. Doesn't that belittle Tomiki's contributions? I would think that you should be proud to be classed separately.

But if you branch off on your own with different ideas then it seems kind of odd to want to be included under the old definition. Doesn't that belittle Tomiki's contributions? I would think that you should be proud to be classed separately.

Afaik Tomiki developed his competitive method and saw it as part of the Aikikai training system initially - it was even taught to Aikikai dojo in Japan before and since the official separation if I am correct. He did not intend to go off and create his own style at first. This happened because of politics imho.

This is not about me. I love Tomiki's approach and cross train and share ideas with instructors from all styles and systems, promoting harmony and understanding between styles and systems. My only point was that those in the Aikikai who hold onto Ueshiba M.'s statement about competition (and use it as an excuse to exclude other groups and encourage division) are among those who are actually opposing his vision of Aikido as a force of harmony.

If the diverse practitioners of Aikido who hold lineage to Ueshiba M. cannot harmonize with each other, how could they hope to manifest even a small part of Ueshiba M.'s vision for Aikido as a means to unite all of humanity?

I'll say again however, this is not the case with all people. There are some who do not let that misunderstanding between Ueshiba M. and Tomiki or anyone else get in the way of some very good training and learning from different perspectives.

My only point was that those in the Aikikai who hold onto Ueshiba M.'s statement about competition (and use it as an excuse to exclude other groups and encourage division) are among those who are actually opposing his vision of Aikido as a force of harmony.

If the diverse practitioners of Aikido who hold lineage to Ueshiba M. cannot harmonize with each other, how could they hope to manifest even a small part of Ueshiba M.'s vision for Aikido as a means to unite all of humanity?

I thought that the reason why such a group as Shodokan Aikido was not part of the Aikikai was on the grounds that its philosophy (that of competition) was at odds with that of the Aikikai?
I'm sure they're all for inclusion, and harmony etc., but certain things - i'm sure you'll readily agree - they will obviously be unable to accept.

I don't know much about the issue, but i would be shocked if there were those in the Aikikai who use O'Sensei's teachings merely as an excuse to maintain power/division, rather than actually because they believe in them and are devoting their lives to them.

I read that one reason why Jigaro Kano liked Aikido so much was because it was reminiscent of the old martial arts - e.g., it did not have competition; and i would have thought that O'Sensei would have introduced competition himself, had he thought much of it.
I was under the impression that (again) one reason why he didn't, was because he saw aikido as a Budo, meaning that there was no place for competition in it.

I thought that the reason why such a group as Shodokan Aikido was not part of the Aikikai was on the grounds that its philosophy (that of competition) was at odds with that of the Aikikai?
I'm sure they're all for inclusion, and harmony etc., but certain things - i'm sure you'll readily agree - they will obviously be unable to accept.

I don't know much about the issue, but i would be shocked if there were those in the Aikikai who use O'Sensei's teachings merely as an excuse to maintain power/division, rather than actually because they believe in them and are devoting their lives to them.

I read that one reason why Jigaro Kano liked Aikido so much was because it was reminiscent of the old martial arts - e.g., it did not have competition; and i would have thought that O'Sensei would have introduced competition himself, had he thought much of it.
I was under the impression that (again) one reason why he didn't, was because he saw aikido as a Budo, meaning that there was no place for competition in it.

Respectfully

- GG

I was actually going to go line by line and address a number of these things, but I just can't bring myself to. I would simply ask the following:

1) If you are going to reference Budo as not having competition . . does that mean Kendo is not Budo?

2) What is the difference between a mainline tradition in Japanese martial arts and a new tradition created under the blessings of the founder/chief instructor . . versus a new martial system that doesn't try acknowledge its roots? Can you think of examples of each?

3) To be considered aikido - must you belong to the Aikikai? If so, why? If not, why not?

4) What makes you think that ANY organization does not have people that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position? Seriously? Or am I just too cynical?

Larry, I'm recently arrived just across the CA/US border from you (sorta) and hope to get to work out with you at some point and see where our training in aikido/jujutsu may overlap, as well as celebrate whatever differences we might find.

I was actually going to go line by line and address a number of these things, but I just can't bring myself to. I would simply ask the following:

1) If you are going to reference Budo as not having competition . . does that mean Kendo is not Budo?

2) What is the difference between a mainline tradition in Japanese martial arts and a new tradition created under the blessings of the founder/chief instructor . . versus a new martial system that doesn't try acknowledge its roots? Can you think of examples of each?

3) To be considered aikido - must you belong to the Aikikai? If so, why? If not, why not?

4) What makes you think that ANY organization does not have people that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position? Seriously? Or am I just too cynical?

1. That's a good point. What i meant was that i was under the impression that O'Sensei saw his Budo as not having competition in it - by definition; bound up with his spiritual/religious beliefs as it was, he saw aikido as being a means of simultaneously practising martial arts, and cultivating your character (unless i'm mistaken - which i may be):

'Iron is full of impurities that weaken it; through forging, it becomes steel and is transformed into a razor-sharp sword. Human beings develop in the same fashion.'

If you do not forge it in the correct way, you will not transform it into a 'razor-sharp sword', to continue the analogy.

'As soon as you concern yourself with the "good" and "bad" of your fellows, you create an opening in your heart for maliciousness to enter. Testing, competing with, and criticizing others weaken and defeat you'

- Morihei Ueshiba

3. That's a very good question: what is aikido? I guess that as it is defined as 'the way of harmony', then would competing with somebody be an example of being in harmony - or conflict?
Perhaps there is aikido - the techniques; and there is aikido - 'the way'...?
I guess if asked how i see it, i would say - to me - it is the latter: i am a philosopher, and i found the philosophical dimensions expressed in aikido to be profound.

I don't know if i'd view competition as a good or bad way to spend my time practicing aikido, to be honest...i've never thought about it.

4. I don't think you're being cynical, necessarily; but rather than saying 'there are people in the Aikikai who have an agenda contrary to the interests of aikido' etc., there should actually be some grounds/an argument/evidence for saying it.
It's a possibility this is the case, but what is the statement based on?

My own experience of people in the hierarchies of aikido organisations is that they are quite selfless, and certainly not 'in it for the money'.
I know nothing of the Aikikai's business dealings however, and whether they are a Walmart-style operation, or what have you...

So are you basing your definition of "his" Budo based on what the Aikikai teaches? Snippets of what Ueshiba said? Observations from those who where there of what he did? You see any potential conflicts? Who decides who's right and how the "right" way to do things gets applied?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

3. That's a very good question: what is aikido? I guess that as it is defined as 'the way of harmony', then would competing with somebody be an example of being in harmony - or conflict?

Interesting - Harmony? Just the way of harmony? Not with ki as in life energy or ki as in spirit of the universe? Ki already seems to have multiple definitions whether it's kami, heaven & earth, the physical universe, the spirit world, actual defineable bodyskills . . since aikido is a physical art that (depending on who you train with) may claim emotional, mental and spiritual components . . which takes precedence in a Budo that manifests as a physical practice around combatives?

In addition, there's the whole notion of harmony . . is that being happy and passing a rock around a circle. . or . . fitting in appropriately (wow, that can be loaded and full of context) . .or . . not opposing force with force (darn, that's sounding like judo . . ) . .or . . choices, choices . . who gets to make that call?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

I don't know if i'd view competition as a good or bad way to spend my time practicing aikido, to be honest...i've never thought about it.

Yet, you've posted a lot of words around something you have never thought about.

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

4. I don't think you're being cynical, necessarily; but rather than saying 'there are people in the Aikikai who have an agenda contrary to the interests of aikido' etc., there should actually be some grounds/an argument/evidence for saying it.
It's a possibility this is the case, but what is the statement based on?

Ah, but there's the rub . . I didn't say that 'there are people in the Aikikai who have an agenda contrary to the interests of aikido' (which I find interesting that you quoted, like I wrote it) . . I asked, "What makes you think that ANY organization does not have people that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position?"

The statement is based on experiences with human nature - regardless of activity or organization is that there are plenty that behave in questionable or even detestible ways whose motivations, when questioned, would likely (and no doubt, to them, legitimately, in many cases) be around noble aims . . good intentions, etc . .

Yup, I'll just make an admittedly blanket statement without firsthand knowledge and say that in all likelihood this happens in the hierarchies of aikido, too.

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

My own experience of people in the hierarchies of aikido organisations is that they are quite selfless, and certainly not 'in it for the money'.
I know nothing of the Aikikai's business dealings however, and whether they are a Walmart-style operation, or what have you...

Well, that's good, then - but I never wrote 'in it for the money' . .although . . nah, I know (and of) too many people killing themselves trying to make a decent living through the martial arts to demean what they do by making more blanket statements . . but I'd suggest you do a little more processing between what I write versus what you think I write, fair?

So are you basing your definition of "his" Budo based on what the Aikikai teaches? Snippets of what Ueshiba said? Observations from those who where there of what he did? You see any potential conflicts? Who decides who's right and how the "right" way to do things gets applied?

Interesting - Harmony? Just the way of harmony? Not with ki as in life energy or ki as in spirit of the universe? Ki already seems to have multiple definitions whether it's kami, heaven & earth, the physical universe, the spirit world, actual defineable bodyskills . . since aikido is a physical art that (depending on who you train with) may claim emotional, mental and spiritual components . . which takes precedence in a Budo that manifests as a physical practice around combatives?

In addition, there's the whole notion of harmony . . is that being happy and passing a rock around a circle. . or . . fitting in appropriately (wow, that can be loaded and full of context) . .or . . not opposing force with force (darn, that's sounding like judo . . ) . .or . . choices, choices . . who gets to make that call?

Yet, you've posted a lot of words around something you have never thought about.

Ah, but there's the rub . . I didn't say that 'there are people in the Aikikai who have an agenda contrary to the interests of aikido' (which I find interesting that you quoted, like I wrote it) . . I asked, "What makes you think that ANY organization does not have people that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position?"

The statement is based on experiences with human nature - regardless of activity or organization is that there are plenty that behave in questionable or even detestible ways whose motivations, when questioned, would likely (and no doubt, to them, legitimately, in many cases) be around noble aims . . good intentions, etc . .

Yup, I'll just make an admittedly blanket statement without firsthand knowledge and say that in all likelihood this happens in the hierarchies of aikido, too.

Well, that's good, then - but I never wrote 'in it for the money' . .although . . nah, I know (and of) too many people killing themselves trying to make a decent living through the martial arts to demean what they do by making more blanket statements . . but I'd suggest you do a little more processing between what I write versus what you think I write, fair?

Cool, back atcha.

Yeah: based upon O'Sensei having said words to the effect of 'i don't believe in competition' i have based my understanding of what he defined his Budo as, on what he said - as well as his practice of it too: having no competition in it as he practiced it at the Aikikai (and everywhere else) - which i believe he founded/taught at...
That seems very unambiguous to me.

Who defines aikido? The person who creates it, i would say is the person who defines it: the components (ai, ki, and do) already had definitions in the Japanese language (i would imagine), and so these were combined, as their meanings corresponded to the defintion of what he wished to give a name to (viz., aikido)...

'The way of harmony' - indeed. From this definition is not excluded '...with ki as in life energy or ki as in spirit of the universe'.
My answer was not restrictive - quite the contrary, in fact.

The notion of harmony? I would say that those who are experts in the definition/application of words would be best placed to answer questions regarding the application of words to events, objects, etc.

'Yet, you've posted a lot of words around something you have never thought about.'

I think you misunderstand: i have not posted a lot of words, and nor do i accept that they were about this; rather, they were concerning the attitude of another person towards competition.

I didn't quote somebody as if it was attributable to you. I think you misunderstood.

You can generalise, and say 'Yup, I'll just make an admittedly blanket statement without firsthand knowledge and say that in all likelihood this happens in the hierarchies of aikido, too.', but that doesn't advance this position at all: we're still in the dark as to what the reality is.
It's possible, but 'in all likelihood' allows for the possibility that it is not the case that this happens...

'there are plenty that behave in questionable or even detestible ways' - but then: there are plenty that don't.

'but I never wrote 'in it for the money' '

I think you misunderstand: i was not saying that you said these exact words; i was replying to your assertion that within the Aikikai there are those 'that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position' - 'in it for the money' is not necessarily literal, but is a shorthand expressing this.

Yeah: based upon O'Sensei having said words to the effect of 'i don't believe in competition' i have based my understanding of what he defined his Budo as, on what he said - as well as his practice of it too: having no competition in it as he practiced it at the Aikikai (and everywhere else) - which i believe he founded/taught at...
That seems very unambiguous to me.

Yet, there's ongoing debate on what exactly he meant by 'competition' and it's unambiguous to you? There's ongoing debate regarding the translations into English that you are quoting and it's unambiguous to you? Are you ignoring the debates, unaware of them or just choosing the side you like best and sticking with that? His practice of aikido certainly included shiai . . perhaps not in the form of arranged matches for sport events, but more a form of "come on then, if you're hard enough" -- how do you think he got all those rough and tumble judoka to stick with aikido (the same ones that later complained about listening to the old man go on for hours)?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

Who defines aikido? The person who creates it, i would say is the person who defines it: the components (ai, ki, and do) already had definitions in the Japanese language (i would imagine), and so these were combined, as their meanings corresponded to the defintion of what he wished to give a name to (viz., aikido)...

Uh huh . . are you aware of how the name came about? Are you saying that Ueshiba both defined explicitly and named aikido? Are there any gaps you're aware of between what he did, what he taught and what is now practiced as mainstream aikido? Is it possible that some of the ongoing debates that I reference above might be related to some of those "gaps" as perceived by others . . does it all still seem unambiguous to you?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

'The way of harmony' - indeed. From this definition is not excluded '...with ki as in life energy or ki as in spirit of the universe'.
My answer was not restrictive - quite the contrary, in fact.

Yet, unless I'm continuing to misunderstand - you're trying to restrict what aikido includes based on what I'm pointing out to be a rather limited perspective.

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

The notion of harmony? I would say that those who are experts in the definition/application of words would be best placed to answer questions regarding the application of words to events, objects, etc.

And do you just accept what they say or define? What if there's conflicting statements or definitions? How do you reconcile them or do you accept that there's . . conflicting definitions?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

'Yet, you've posted a lot of words around something you have never thought about.'

I think you misunderstand: i have not posted a lot of words, and nor do i accept that they were about this; rather, they were concerning the attitude of another person towards competition.

I didn't quote somebody as if it was attributable to you. I think you misunderstood.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one . .

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

You can generalise, and say 'Yup, I'll just make an admittedly blanket statement without firsthand knowledge and say that in all likelihood this happens in the hierarchies of aikido, too.', but that doesn't advance this position at all: we're still in the dark as to what the reality is.
It's possible, but 'in all likelihood' allows for the possibility that it is not the case that this happens...

Uh huh, anything's possible . . I think you're going to stay in the dark about the reality at this rate . .

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

'there are plenty that behave in questionable or even detestible ways' - but then: there are plenty that don't.

Now you're just being contradictory . . yes, you are . . yes, you are

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

'but I never wrote 'in it for the money' '

I think you misunderstand: i was not saying that you said these exact words; i was replying to your assertion that within the Aikikai there are those 'that are in it with a major objective of maintaining their power and position' - 'in it for the money' is not necessarily literal, but is a shorthand expressing this.

Regards

- GG

No, I understood that part . . I was just highlighting the irony of what you were doing with what I wrote - which is changing the words, which inherently changes the meaning . . and then applying your own definition based on a limited viewpoint to it . . hmmm . . kinda of what I've been saying all along

I thought that the reason why such a group as Shodokan Aikido was not part of the Aikikai was on the grounds that its philosophy (that of competition) was at odds with that of the Aikikai?

Competition is not the only or even primary thing that defines Shodokan Aikido, so it is not our philosophy per se, more like a training and testing tool imho.

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

I'm sure they're all for inclusion, and harmony etc., but certain things - i'm sure you'll readily agree - they will obviously be unable to accept.

Actually they are not all for harmony, inclusion etc. To be blunt I've heard about Shodokan people being disallowed from even entering dojo of certain sensei because of the question being discussed here. I also have some personal experiences along similar lines. But once again I will say, this is not the case in some cases so it is not a condemnation of the Aikikai in any form, only a group of sensei who use the competition statement to promote a non-inclusive agenda.

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

I don't know much about the issue, but i would be shocked if there were those in the Aikikai who use O'Sensei's teachings merely as an excuse to maintain power/division, rather than actually because they believe in them and are devoting their lives to them.

Interesting that you say that - in other words if they choose to focus on the very small part of Ueshiba M.'s ideas that may encourage division instead of the vast amount of ideas he put forward that encouraged global unity. Don't you find that interesting?

Quote:

George Howard wrote:

I was under the impression that (again) one reason why he didn't, was because he saw aikido as a Budo, meaning that there was no place for competition in it.

Budd's statement about Kendoka and Judoka sums up my feelings on this. Competition and Budo are not mutually exclusive. In fact, since a major element of Budo deals with honest self evaluation (which is hard to deny when dealing with a resistant partner) so that one can achieve personal development through training, I'd say that without it you are missing a good yardstick to measure your progress along the "Way". It is not the only way to measure progress of course, but it does provide an objective basis imho.

Quote:

Larry, I'm recently arrived just across the CA/US border from you (sorta) and hope to get to work out with you at some point and see where our training in aikido/jujutsu may overlap, as well as celebrate whatever differences we might find.

Hi Budd. You are most welcome. My dojo is always open and I am always willing to celebrate the differences I find. This is how we broaden our reality and perception. Of course whenever I am south of the border I may do the same. PM me if needed.

Nice articles and really beg the question where to from here?
I've been training long enough to see the ebb and flow of a few organisations and some number of dojo with it. It seems that keeping links to Japan alive is something challenging to preserve and develop, but what to do if its severed or never existed in the first place? That finding teachers with something to teach is a diminishing pool of talent the longer you practice. That at some point nearly everyone wants to be king.

Rhizome seems to be a good organic solution that exists informerly. Its interestingly today that more that a few organisations profess this kind of thinking but maybe is a front end for the usual hierachy.

One solution might be to go the way of the ninja. Take the dan grades at hombu up to 15-dan, then offer any aiki ryuha soke a generous belt and certificate (under some conditions) and have a worldwide group aikihug

best,
dan

Quote:

David Yap wrote:

Hi all,

There is always something about coincidences - coincidentally, these two just crop up in the Aikido Journal blogs while we were on this subject:

I recently watched a jiujitsu class, in a small system with only five dojos in total. I was almost chocked to see that the techniques were even called ikkyo and sankyo - they were simply doing aikido without high falls wearing coloured belts (which nobody does around here) claiming that "aikido is a art for personal growth and harmony with the universe, we are doing self defence". I can imagine one or two aikido teachers not agreing with their view on what aikido is, but who cares. Based on the techiniques it was most definately aikido, but they call it jiujitsu, which is a namn that no lineage has exclusive right to... well okay. Then it isn't aikido, I guess. They probably had some judo mixed in with that aikido-so-called-jiujitsu, too.

There is also Aiki-jujitsu. Many styles/ryus of it though . In fact, O'Sensei had his background in Daitoryu Aiki-jujitsu (School of The Big East).

I think you have a point. The Aikikai is the parent organization of Aikido and represents the last developments in the art of Aikido as taught by the Ueshiba family. The others are not only reflections of what the Founder taught at different times but they are also representations of what those individual leaders discovered and developed themselves.
O Sensei said that Aikido had no set form - that it was a "study of the spirit." My own teacher has said to me that Aikido has no form. If that is the case, then the styles are not what this is about. That's why many styles are allowed within the Aikikai.
Aikido is about principles and when those universal principles are in play, you have Aikido, whatever the style.

Aikido organizations are not really about styles. Like all organizations, they may have a product to promote and indeed, one that distinguishes them from other groups, but they are really about jurisdiction and authority. The battle of organizations is one to gain power through greater jurisdiction. The great names the organizations promote are to establish authority thus helping them in the quest for organizational "life" or jurisdiction. That is not to say that all are equal or as efficient and fair as they could be. That is a matter of organizational integrity and ethics but when push comes to shove, the organizations are about jurisdiction and establishing authority by means of gaining legitimacy and respect in the eyes of the public. (Size and an early point of origin are helps in the quest for legitimacy.) As that (legitimacy in the eyes of potential and actual constituents ) rises and falls, so does the fate of an organization. The Aikikai certainly has an advantage there but all the other organizations have to play the same game because they are playing in the same arena.
Best wishes,

It has been my dream to see Aikido being united all over the world (Creating situations where any Aikidoka can cross-train at any Aikido dojo anywhere in the world without feeling guilty of "betraying" one club over another, or without feeling the pressure of choosing only one club over another).

It has been my dream to see Aikido being united all over the world (Creating situations where any Aikidoka can cross-train at any Aikido dojo anywhere in the world without feeling guilty of "betraying" one club over another, or without feeling the pressure of choosing only one club over another).

It seems that this will never be practically possible.

If you think that you're feeling pressure then your probably right .

On the other hand, I think that the "pressure" most people feel is primarily their own responsibility. Mind over matter - I don't mind, so it doesn't matter.

What do you mean by "united"?
What we call aikido today has its roots in the same ryu or better teh same kaiso.
But different lines of tradition have given what is called aikido different shapes depending on the teachers (shihan) they follow.
Saito sensei, Yamaguchi sensei, Shioda sensei, Nishio sensei, Mochizuki sensei, Tohei sensei ... and a lot of other names.

So what does "united" mean:
Doing ikkyo the same way?
Being organised in just one Organization?
(How should it be structured: Like a western federation or like a japaneze ryu?)

If you mean

Quote:

Creating situations where any Aikidoka can cross-train at any Aikido dojo anywhere in the world without feeling guilty of "betraying" one club over another, or without feeling the pressure of choosing only one club over another.

then be aware that this form of unity exists. In my surrounding this is truly possible. And is done by a lot of practioners.

Wow - this thread has also been revived, and for the second time this year . You did notice it started at 2006 prior to writing a message

Quote:

Randall Lim wrote:

It has been my dream to see Aikido being united all over the world (Creating situations where any Aikidoka can cross-train at any Aikido dojo anywhere in the world without feeling guilty of "betraying" one club over another, or without feeling the pressure of choosing only one club over another).

It seems that this will never be practically possible.

And where exactly is the problem with realizing this dream?
Who ever is forcing you to feel guilty?

Nobody else controls your feelings, and you can go and train anywhere you wish the teacher is willing to accept you, regardless of "style". So, you can

Amir

P.S.

Quote:

Carsten Möllering wrote:

What do you mean by "united"?
What we call aikido today has its roots in the same ryu or better teh same kaiso.
But different lines of tradition have given what is called aikido different shapes depending on the teachers (shihan) they follow.
Saito sensei, Yamaguchi sensei, Shioda sensei, Nishio sensei, Mochizuki sensei, Tohei sensei ... and a lot of other names.

This is true for most Aikido styles, which have originated from Ueshiba, not to all (e.g. Korindo, founded by Hirai sensei,and not connected to Daito-ryu). As I have already commentd at the first page of this thread.

On the other hand, I think that the "pressure" most people feel is primarily their own responsibility. Mind over matter - I don't mind, so it doesn't matter.

Best,

Chris

I don't mind cross-training at two or more unaffiliated clubs on a regular basis. I am not concerned with belt colour, rank or grading. I just want to train. But the trouble is: these unaffiliated clubs would really mind my "dual-membership".

What do you mean by "united"?
So what does "united" mean:
Doing ikkyo the same way?
Being organised in just one Organization?
(How should it be structured: Like a western federation or like a japaneze ryu?)

United in warm fellowship with all clubs joining one umbrella organisation which takes care of the interests of any Aikido club. A situation in which any Aikido club warmly welcomes any Aikidoka from any other Aikido club to train with them regularly without demanding loyalty.

United in warm fellowship with all clubs joining one umbrella organisation which takes care of the interests of any Aikido club. A situation in which any Aikido club warmly welcomes any Aikidoka from any other Aikido club to train with them regularly without demanding loyalty.

I like this idea of being open and willing to train in any style or in any group.Unfortunately I think that some instructors are not open minded to this concept.Their egos get in the way and in some cases they want to remain big fish in a little pond.Not only that they by their actions tend to prevent their students from seeking info from others.In fact I myself have been refused opportunities to train with other groups [different organisations] in my own area.I have little chance of fraternising with junior students when the leaders of these dojo maintain a closed shop . Years of aikido in the U.K have convinced me that the idea of a united Aikido multi group of different organisations based on mutual respect is by and large a pipe dream.I am afraid that O Sensei did not take into consideration the frailties of human nature. Still we can only live and hope---
Please note , I welcome the opportunity to practise with any /all people who are sincere.

It is my understanding that O' Sensei did not create a style he created the foundations for Aikido. Once a student had gained a good understanding of these foundato
ions it is for him/her to then develop their own Aikido. We are all individuals. Therefore, our own Aikido is individual. However, it does not mean to say that we do not have great influences upon our learning and practice of Aikido, as one day your students will have of you. Stay true to the foundation of O' Sensei's legacy then Aikido has a heritage that will continue. Your development of those foundations gives you your Aikido.

I like this idea of being open and willing to train in any style or in any group.Unfortunately I think that some instructors are not open minded to this concept.Their egos get in the way and in some cases they want to remain big fish in a little pond.Not only that they by their actions tend to prevent their students from seeking info from others.In fact I myself have been refused opportunities to train with other groups [different organisations] in my own area.I have little chance of fraternising with junior students when the leaders of these dojo maintain a closed shop . Years of aikido in the U.K have convinced me that the idea of a united Aikido multi group of different organisations based on mutual respect is by and large a pipe dream.I am afraid that O Sensei did not take into consideration the frailties of human nature. Still we can only live and hope---
Please note , I welcome the opportunity to practise with any /all people who are sincere.

There is a Dojo just a mere 10-minute walk from my home. I hope to suppliment my current weekly training at my own club (which is a good 30-minute drive) with regular training at this nearby Dojo, but cannot simply because it is run by a non-affiliated club.

I am not concerned about rank, grading or differences in styles (willing to wear my white belt all over again), but I am still not welcomed.

There is a Dojo just a mere 10-minute walk from my home. I hope to suppliment my current weekly training at my own club (which is a good 30-minute drive) with regular training at this nearby Dojo, but cannot simply because it is run by a non-affiliated club.

I am not concerned about rank, grading or differences in styles (willing to wear my white belt all over again), but I am still not welcomed.

How is that connected with unification? This is an issue of teachers methodology and not of

Different teachers teach in different manners, for most of them, a student saying "but in XXX dojo they do it the other way" would create an interuption they are not willing to accept, be XXX in the same organization or in another one. Some of those teachers would not know to explain the reasons for the way taught by them, others, are afraid to admit another variation might be better, and others would not be willing to find a disruption in class becausse some students are trying the other varyiation and have problems.

Some teachers also believe it is not in the best interest of their student to learn the same technique with varying emphasis at the same time. They consider it to confuse te student and hamper is progress. Such a teacher may refuse to have his student consistently learn a very similar M.A. in another place

Some teachers would consider such a state as putting them in a continous popularity contest with another teacher, and thus hampering their methodological considerations (the students should practice the same techniques for the nth time, but then he will think of my lessons as boring compared to ...)

A good teacher invests in his studens. Some may wish to feel they are the ones responsile for his progress rather then share the fame.

Lots of reasons, all of which have to do with humans, not with organizations.

There is a Dojo just a mere 10-minute walk from my home. I hope to suppliment my current weekly training at my own club (which is a good 30-minute drive) with regular training at this nearby Dojo, but cannot simply because it is run by a non-affiliated club.

I am not concerned about rank, grading or differences in styles (willing to wear my white belt all over again), but I am still not welcomed.

Well, there's no Aikikai rule against training anywhere in particular, affiliated or not. If it's a non-Aikikai dojo that is causing the problem then it's really their problem isn't it?